[Mbodell]

---

If it matters, you are playing IMP teams.

[foobar]

Mbodell, on 2015-March-01, 15:59, said:

---

If it matters, you are playing IMP teams.

Do we have any agreements on the differences between 2♠ and 3♠ (given that both should be forcing opposite a pass)? Does the latter set the trump suit and demand a cue bid?

If it demands a cue, I might try 4♥ assuming we are bidding both first and second round controls. If it's not a random BBO "expert", pard should be sensible enough to realize that it denies minor suit control and won't launch into orbit without using RKC, etc. when appropriate.

[Mbodell]

foobar, on 2015-March-01, 16:44, said:

Do we have any agreements on the differences between 2♠ and 3♠ (given that both should be forcing opposite a pass)? Does the latter set the trump suit and demand a cue bid?

If it demands a cue, I might try 4♥ assuming we are bidding both first and second round controls. If it's not a random BBO "expert", pard should be sensible enough to realize that it denies minor suit control and won't launch into orbit without using RKC, etc. when appropriate.

We play many normalish expert standard treatments like italian style cues, non-serious 3nt, splinters, etc. We are in a game force, so 2♠ would have been spades. An auction with no opponent bidding like 2♣-2♦-3♠ would have set trump and demanded cuing.

[awm]

On this hand, it feels like 3NT would be sort of a safety play. There are unfortunately three possible interpretations of the bid though (depending partnership agreement):

1. Suggesting to play 3NT. Probably the least likely meaning. Nonetheless with a huge stack of hearts it is imaginable that 3NT is not a bad spot.
2. Showing a bad hand in context (non-serious) but not bad enough to bid 4♠. Seems to describe what we have. Will cue 4♥ if partner cue bids over this.
3. Denying a first-round control. Hey we have that too! Again will cue 4♥ next if given the chance.

I'd be concerned that 4♥ sounds like some more useful slam hand like xxx Axxx Qxx xxx and may cause partner to keycard when we don't have five-level safety (for example).

[foobar]

Mbodell, on 2015-March-01, 17:13, said:

We play many normalish expert standard treatments like italian style cues, non-serious 3nt, splinters, etc. We are in a game force, so 2♠ would have been spades. An auction with no opponent bidding like 2♣-2♦-3♠ would have set trump and demanded cuing.

In context of the bidding agreements (specifically non-serious 3N), 3N seems to be the best hedge here. If pard passes, it should be playable contract and we can bid 4♥ if pard cue bids a minor.

[mike777]

4s

no problem yet.

[rmnka447]

To me, 3 ♠ sets ♠ as trump and suggests that opener probably doesn't want to play below 4 ♠. With RHO opponent bidding ♥, it's not clear much how the ♥ KQJx are worth. You do have a potential ruffing value in ♦. You'd be more excited if the KQJx were in ♣s.

At this point, I think 4 ♠ is right.

[Phil]

Could my hearts be the key to slam opposite something like AKQJxxx x AQ AQx?

Assuming 3♠ shows a solid suit 3N should probably be a bunch of quacks and an offer to play. But if it's some sort of non serious it seems ideal.

[mr1303]

Given partner almost certainly will be short in hearts, making slam tries here is a distinct overbid. I bid 4S.

[helene_t]

mr1303, on 2015-March-02, 05:01, said:

Given partner almost certainly will be short in hearts, making slam tries here is a distinct overbid. I bid 4S.

Yes I think that's right, we have shown a non-bust already and that is pretty much what we have.

[MrAce]

To me 3♠ sets the trump. Thus playing 3 NT as an offer to play is not the optimum use of this bid.
Any new suit is a cue, 3 NT is quacks as Phil said but better than 4♠, which can not cue. 4♠ is the worst hand possible, especially after we already said we are better than bust. In this context I can go with either of 3 NT or 4♠ I prefer 4♠ because my quacks are not gonna be useful for pd most of the time. Of course it depends on the hand he holds, but I do not feel guilty since I already said I have at least some quacks.

[KurtGodel]

I will bid 4♥, because that's what I have. Would be unfortunate if partner had a solid hand apart from two little hearts, in which case slam won't make, but they haven't led AH yet.

Whilst I appreciate our hand isn't great, we have 2 heart tricks, a potentially useful doubleton in diamonds, and an entry in spades (probably). We could have a lot less than this.